Granger v. Daniels

Full title: EMMITT L. GRANGER, JR., Petitioner, v. CHARLES DANIELS, WARDEN, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jun 15, 2006

06-CV-101-AS (D. Or. Jun. 15, 2006)

Opinion

06-CV-101-AS.

June 15, 2006

CRAIG J. GABRIEL, Ransom Blackman, LLP Portland, OR, Attorneys for Petitioner.

KARIN J. IMMERGUT, United States Attorney SCOTT ERIK ASPHAUG, Assistant United States Attorney, Portland, OR, THERESA TOLENTINO TALPLACIDO, United States Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Seattle, WA, Attorneys for Respondent.

ORDER

ANNA BROWN, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas issued Findings and Recommendation (#17) on May 24, 2006, in which he recommended this Court deny Petitioner Granger's Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus (#1) and dismiss the proceeding. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, this Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9^th Cir. 1983). See also Lorin Corp. v. Goto Co., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8^th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, the Court does not find any error.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Ashmanskas's Findings and Recommendation (#17). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner Granger's Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus (#1) and DISMISSES this proceeding.

IT IS SO ORDERED.